Liberal Forum

RebelGator » 01 Jan 2026, 7:16 pm » wrote: ↑

01 Jan 2026, 7:16 pm

Not me, I'm yelling....rip his bra off!

There isn't much left to rip off.     

Vegas » 01 Jan 2026, 7:09 pm » wrote: ↑

01 Jan 2026, 7:09 pm

Let's evaluate that comment also. Man, you are just begging to get stomped.

Here you go: 
My prompt:


 

Stop right there...

You are, as the record clearly shows, far too **** stupid to use AI.

AI understands English....you're fresh off a boat.
 

Vegas » 01 Jan 2026, 7:10 pm » wrote: ↑

01 Jan 2026, 7:10 pm

My prompts were from your source. 

Enough..

You're a **** idiot.

Blackvegetable » 01 Jan 2026, 7:22 pm » wrote: ↑

01 Jan 2026, 7:22 pm

Enough..

You're a **** idiot.

Ohhhh no! This isn't enough. How many times do you repost my posts over and over? yeah, that's right mother ****. Narcissists can never take what they dish out. Ever. 

This continues.
 

Blackvegetable » 01 Jan 2026, 7:20 pm » wrote: ↑

01 Jan 2026, 7:20 pm

Stop right there...

You are, as the record clearly shows, far too **** stupid to use AI.

AI understands English....you're fresh off a boat.

And the blatant projection continues. You already used this projection. Come up with another cowardly lie. This one has run its course.

Vegas » 01 Jan 2026, 7:27 pm » wrote: ↑

01 Jan 2026, 7:27 pm

And the blatant projection continues. You already used this projection. Come up with another cowardly lie. This one has run its course.

I only asked once.




 

Blackvegetable » 01 Jan 2026, 7:28 pm » wrote: ↑

01 Jan 2026, 7:28 pm

I only asked once.

Asked what? Like I care. you don't answer my questions, so **** your questions. 

1. Oh geeeee....I wonder...pic...prove first time...prove a negative...God damn you are so **** predictable. 

Piece of ****.

Blackvegetable » 01 Jan 2026, 7:28 pm » wrote: ↑

01 Jan 2026, 7:28 pm

I only asked once.

Poor thing, looks like 2026 is gonna be rough on you.

RebelGator » 01 Jan 2026, 7:34 pm » wrote: ↑

01 Jan 2026, 7:34 pm

Poor thing, looks like 2026 is gonna be rough on you.

It wouldn't be so bad for him if he could take what he dishes out. Narcissists can't do that. 

Vegas » 01 Jan 2026, 7:32 pm » wrote: ↑

01 Jan 2026, 7:32 pm

Asked what? 

Already posted.


And ot verified the ATTRIBUTUON of that SPECIFIC photograph.

It did so using Metadata from the Getty Collection of which it is part - NOT FACIAL RECOGNITION.

 

RebelGator » 01 Jan 2026, 7:34 pm » wrote: ↑

01 Jan 2026, 7:34 pm

Poor thing, looks like 2026 is gonna be rough on you.

In 2030, a child will explain to you why it matters...
 

Vegas » 01 Jan 2026, 2:46 pm » wrote: ↑

01 Jan 2026, 2:46 pm

With respect to BV's favorite pic of who he thinks is Trump in drag, he claimed that AI confirmed that was indeed Trump. 

One problem. BV edited the statement or fabricated it altogether.

Here was his lie that he claimed AI replied with: The attribution correctly identifies both the subjects of the photo and the photographer who captured the moment, making it a reliable source.

AI completely nuked him. Here is AI's reply about his claim:

My prompt: 

AI's reply:

This would be a good time for him to live stream his suicide for our enjoyment.

 

Blackvegetable » 01 Jan 2026, 7:36 pm » wrote: ↑

01 Jan 2026, 7:36 pm

Already posted.

And ot verified the ATTRIBUTUON of that SPECIFIC photograph.

It did so using Metadata from the Getty Collection of which it is part - NOT FACIAL RECOGNITION.

So you want to do this with me, huh? Ok, I warned you that AI is my home. But suit yourself. 


Using Getty metadata means the AI repeated an archive’s label; it didn’t verify the identity of the people in the photo, attribution and verification aren’t the same thing. idiot. It can repeat the same wrong ****. God man. If metadata equaled verification, misattributed historical photos wouldn’t exist, but they do, which is why attribution is always provisional. **** moron. 

Knocked out again. 

What else do you got?

*GHETTOBLASTER » 01 Jan 2026, 3:05 pm » wrote: ↑

01 Jan 2026, 3:05 pm

Don't get your hopes up too high because once BV reaches his expiration date all CP has to do to keep his daily input of discussion topics alive is to use AI to recycle all of his threads...!!!   

 
 

ROG62 » 01 Jan 2026, 7:43 pm » wrote: ↑

01 Jan 2026, 7:43 pm

I tried warning this idiot that he isn't going to beat me in AI. It's my job. And he is stupid. 

Blackvegetable » 01 Jan 2026, 6:58 pm » wrote: ↑

01 Jan 2026, 6:58 pm

literally too **** stupid to be allowed to play with AI.

Yes, brown...YOU LITERALLY ARE "too **** stupid to be allowed to play with AI"...

RebelGator » 01 Jan 2026, 7:16 pm » wrote: ↑

01 Jan 2026, 7:16 pm

Not me, I'm yelling....rip his bra off!

I'm thinking...rip the duct tape of his dried pissflaps...

ROG62 » 01 Jan 2026, 7:46 pm » wrote: ↑

01 Jan 2026, 7:46 pm

Yes, brown...YOU LITERALLY ARE "too **** stupid to be allowed to play with AI"...

Vegas is still working on it.

It took me one prompt.

To get to "specific photograph" and "historical record"....not that you begin to have the wherewithal to grasp the significance.

So you can spare everyone 

Blackvegetable » 01 Jan 2026, 7:51 pm » wrote: ↑

01 Jan 2026, 7:51 pm

Vegas is still working on it.

It took me one prompt.

To get to "specific photograph" and "historical record"....not that you begin to have the wherewithal to grasp the significance.

So you can spare everyone

Uh no. I finished.

This "specific photograph" had no "historical record" that verified it. As I have demonstrated.

 

Vegas » 01 Jan 2026, 7:55 pm » wrote: ↑

01 Jan 2026, 7:55 pm

Uh no. I finished.

This "specific photograph" had no "historical record" that verified it. As I have demonstrated.

Your prompts, as demonstrated repeatedly, suck.

I'm weary of explaining why.